Category Archives: Fifth Amendment

To poster 4. By “loved one” do you mean a wife/husband or more along the lines of a girlfriend? Technically, a spouse is able to plead the fifth in cases dealing with their significant other. It isn’t required that you do or do not plead the fifth though, but you cannot be forced to incriminate them.

Can you use the fifth amendment in a simple assault case?

does the fifth amendment apply when you have been ordered to testify against a loved one? Do you have to testify or can you “plead the fifth” to not incriminate a loved one?

My question was and has not been answered yet. How does the 5th Amendment to the US constitution involve the taking of real property without just compensation? Very important and what are the consequences?

Moderator’s reply: Unfortunately, we are not equipped to respond to specific questions, which is why we created this discussion section on each article page. In this section, a reader may discuss article topics with other readers. Whether and when your questions will be answered, however, depends on fellow readers and posters.

Under provisions of the Fifth Amendment, can a defendant be required to produce, before the time of trial, relevant evidence to the prosecution?

How does the 5th Amendment to the US Constitution involve the taking of Real Property without just compensation?

Fifth Amendment – The Text No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Fifth Amendment – The Meaning Grand Jury Protection: The Fifth Amendment requirement that serious federal criminal charges be started by a grand jury (a group of citizens who hear evidence from a prosecutor about potential crimes) is rooted in English common law. Its basic purpose is to provide a fair method for beginning criminal proceedings against those accused of committing crimes. Grand jury charges can be issued against anyone except members of the military, who are instead subject to courts-martial in the military justice system.

To avoid giving government unchecked powers, grand jurors are selected from the general population and their work, conducted in secret, is not hampered by rigid rules about the type of evidence that can be heard. In fact, grand jurors can act on their own knowledge and are free to start criminal proceedings on any information that they think relevant.

It is these broad powers that have led some critics to charge that grand juries are little more than puppets of prosecutors. Grand juries also serve an investigative role-because grand juries can compel witnesses to testify in the absence of their lawyers.

A significant number of states do not use grand juries, instead they begin criminal proceedings using informations or indictments. The right to a grand jury is one of only a few protections in the Bill of Rights that has not been applied to the states by the Fourteenth Amendment.

Protection against Double Jeopardy: This portion of the Fifth Amendment protects individuals from being twice put in jeopardy of life or limbthat is, in danger of being punished more than once for the same criminal act. The U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted the double jeopardy clause to protect against a second prosecution for the same offense after acquittal or conviction and against multiple punishments for the same crime. Like other provisions in the Bill of Rights that affect criminal prosecutions, the double jeopardy clause is rooted in the idea that the government should not have unlimited power to prosecute and punish criminal suspects. Rather, the government gets only one chance to make its case.

Right against Self-Incrimination: This provision of the Fifth Amendment is probably the best-known of all constitutional rights, as it appears frequently on television and in movieswhether in dramatic courtroom scenes (I take the Fifth!) or before the police question someone in their custody (You have the right to remain silent. Anything you do say can be used against you in a court of law.). The right protects a person from being forced to reveal to the police, prosecutor, judge, or jury any information that might subject him or her to criminal prosecution. Even if a person is guilty of a crime, the Fifth Amendment demands that the prosecutors come up with other evidence to prove their case. If police violate the Fifth Amendment by forcing a suspect to confess, a court may suppress the confession, that is, prohibit it from being used as evidence at trial.

The right to remain silent also means that a defendant has the right not to take the witness stand at all during his or her trial, and that the prosecutor cannot point to the defendants silence as evidence of guilt. There are, however, limitations on the right against self-incrimination. For example, it applies only to testimonial acts, such as speaking, nodding, or writing. Other personal information that might be incriminating, like blood or hair samples, DNA or fingerprints, may be used as evidence. Similarly, incriminating statements that an individual makes voluntarilysuch as when a suspect confesses to a friend or writes in a personal diaryare not protected.

Right to Due Process: The right to due process of law has been recognized since 1215, when the Magna Carta (the British charter) was adopted. Historically, the right protected people accused of crimes from being imprisoned without fair procedures (like indictments and trials, where they would have an opportunity to confront their accusers). The right of due process has grown in two directions: It affords individuals a right to a fair process (known as procedural due process) and a right to enjoy certain fundamental liberties without governmental interference (known as substantive due process). The Fifth Amendments due process clause applies to the federal governments conduct. In 1868 the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment expanded the right of due process to include limits on the actions of state governments.

Today, court decisions interpreting the Fourteenth Amendments due process right generally apply to the Fifth Amendment and vice versa.

Takings Clause: The takings clause of the Fifth Amendment strikes a balance between the rights of private property owners and the right of the government to take that property for a purpose that benefits the public at large. When the government takes private property, it is required to pay just compensation to the property owner for his or her loss. The takings power of the government, sometimes referred to as the power of eminent domain, may be used for a wide range of valid public uses (for a highway or a park, for example). For the most part, when defining just compensation, courts try to reach some approximation of market value.

On Monday, Mark MacDougall, the attorney for former State Department employee Bryan Pagliano, sent a letter to House Select Committee on Benghazi Chairman Trey Gowdy indicating that Pagliano would assert his Fifth Amendment right not to appear before the Select Committee for a deposition on September 10, 2015. A copy of the letter was obtained by CNN.

MacDougall also says that Pagliano would likewise “decline to produce documents that may be responsive to the subpoena.” In the letter, MacDougall defends the decision to invoke the Fifth Amendment by expressing concern about “the current political environment” surrounding Clinton’s email use.

Pagliano is a former IT staffer who worked for Clinton and assisted with her email and server. On August 11, Gowdy issued a subpoena for his deposition. A Democratic committee source says there was “no debate or vote by the select committee” about the decision to issue Pagliano subpoena.

Responding to additional requests regarding Clinton’s private server from Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley’s staff, Pagliano’s legal counsel also said yesterday that “he would plead the 5th to any and all questions if he were compelled to testify” before the Judiciary Committee, according to a spokesman for the senator.

Benghazi panel set to grill top Clinton aides

In a letter to Democratic members of the Select Committee on Benghazi defending Pagliano’s decision, Democratic committee staff wrote “Despite the lack of any evidence of criminal activity, it is understandable that attorneys for Mr. Pagliano have advised him to assert his Congressional right not to testify given the onslaught of reckless accusations of criminal conduct the continue to be made by many Republicans.”

The staff noted that “Although some commentators may use the invocation of the Fifth Amendment privilege to assert that a criminal investigation may now be underway, the assertion of the Fifth Amendment privilege does not imply the existence of a criminal investigation.”

Additionally, the Democratic committee staff cited multiple statements from Republican presidential candidates and members of Congress implying the existence of criminal activity or a criminal investigation as proof of the “current political environment” referenced in Pagliano’s letter. Thus far, no criminal investigations or criminal charges have been brought against Clinton over the private server.

Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, the Democratic ranking member on the Select Committee, also issued a statement defending of Pagliano’s invocation of the Fifth Amendment, saying, “Although multiple legal experts agree there is no evidence of criminal activity, it is certainly understandable that this witness’ attorneys advised him to assert his Fifth Amendment rights, especially given the onslaught of wild and unsubstantiated accusations by Republican presidential candidates, Members of Congress, and others based on false leaks about the investigation.”

The Select Committee is also set to interrogate two of Clinton’s top aides from her time as Secretary of State this week: former chief-of-staff Cheryl Mills on Thursday, and former top aide Jake Sullivan on Friday. Questions are expected about the server and internal communications between Clinton’s staff.

Go Deep Sea Fishing in Destin the The Worlds Luckiest Fishing Village on Fifth Amendments Destin Charters Welcome to the Fifth Amendment Charters website, home of the best Destin fishing charters and deep sea fishing trips. We catch many saltwater fish species including, Red Snapper, Grouper, Amberjack, Tuna, Mackerel, Vermillion Snapper, Triggerfish, Cobia, Shark, Marlin, & more! The Fifth Ammendment charter boat is docked and departs from the harbor in Destin, Florida. We are family oriented and have been locally owned and operated since 1996. Experience the beauty of our emerald coast while charter fishing in the Gulf of Mexico. Deep sea fishing charters are not only fun and exciting, but a great way for a family to spend the day together.

We offer a variety of Destin fishing charters and fishing trips, ranging from a 4 hour family cruises, to 48 hour, overnight fishing marathons! Our overnight fishing charter offers an awesome fishing experience for the experienced fisherman and novice alike. During 48 hour charter fishing trips we travel much farther into the Gulf of Mexico, and are able to catch more fish. Our 6-8 hour fishing charters are great for anyone interested in catching a lot of fish in a days time. On six to eight hour charter trips you might expect to catch, Red Snapper, Red Grouper, Gag Grouper, Vermillion Snapper, White Snapper (Red Porgy), Triggerfish, Amberjack, King Mackerel, and even the occasional tuna or dolphin fish (Mahi-Mahi).

We use only the best fishing equipment available. We provide fishing rods, reels, bait, and tackle. Captain Chuck has been fishing the Gulf of Mexico all his life and has been at the helm of the Fifth Amendment charter boat for 19 years! He has the necessary skill and knowledge to ensure you leave with an amazing catch. We pride ourselves on service and we strive to offer a fun filled, and memorable fishing trip. Our crew is well trained, and our captain is Coast Guard licensed and certified. We keep the boat clean, inspected, well maintained and we are Coast Guard Approved. Charter a fishing trip with us and have an adventure of a lifetime!

Grand Jury Protection: The Fifth Amendment requirement that serious federal criminal charges be started by a grand jury (a group of citizens who hear evidence from a prosecutor about potential crimes) is rooted in English common law. Its basic purpose is to provide a fair method for beginning criminal proceedings against those accused of committing crimes. Grand jury charges can be issued against anyone except members of the military, who are instead subject to courts-martial in the military justice system.

To avoid giving government unchecked powers, grand jurors are selected from the general population and their work, conducted in secret, is not hampered by rigid rules about the type of evidence that can be heard. In fact, grand jurors can act on their own knowledge and are free to start criminal proceedings on any information that they think relevant.

It is these broad powers that have led some critics to charge that grand juries are little more than puppets of prosecutors. Grand juries also serve an investigative role-because grand juries can compel witnesses to testify in the absence of their lawyers.

A significant number of states do not use grand juries, instead they begin criminal proceedings using informations or indictments. The right to a grand jury is one of only a few protections in the Bill of Rights that has not been applied to the states by the Fourteenth Amendment.

Protection against Double Jeopardy: This portion of the Fifth Amendment protects individuals from being twice put in jeopardy of life or limbthat is, in danger of being punished more than once for the same criminal act. The U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted the double jeopardy clause to protect against a second prosecution for the same offense after acquittal or conviction and against multiple punishments for the same crime. Like other provisions in the Bill of Rights that affect criminal prosecutions, the double jeopardy clause is rooted in the idea that the government should not have unlimited power to prosecute and punish criminal suspects. Rather, the government gets only one chance to make its case.

Right against Self-Incrimination: This provision of the Fifth Amendment is probably the best-known of all constitutional rights, as it appears frequently on television and in movieswhether in dramatic courtroom scenes (I take the Fifth!) or before the police question someone in their custody (You have the right to remain silent. Anything you do say can be used against you in a court of law.). The right protects a person from being forced to reveal to the police, prosecutor, judge, or jury any information that might subject him or her to criminal prosecution. Even if a person is guilty of a crime, the Fifth Amendment demands that the prosecutors come up with other evidence to prove their case. If police violate the Fifth Amendment by forcing a suspect to confess, a court may suppress the confession, that is, prohibit it from being used as evidence at trial.

The right to remain silent also means that a defendant has the right not to take the witness stand at all during his or her trial, and that the prosecutor cannot point to the defendants silence as evidence of guilt. There are, however, limitations on the right against self-incrimination. For example, it applies only to testimonial acts, such as speaking, nodding, or writing. Other personal information that might be incriminating, like blood or hair samples, DNA or fingerprints, may be used as evidence. Similarly, incriminating statements that an individual makes voluntarilysuch as when a suspect confesses to a friend or writes in a personal diaryare not protected.

Right to Due Process: The right to due process of law has been recognized since 1215, when the Magna Carta (the British charter) was adopted. Historically, the right protected people accused of crimes from being imprisoned without fair procedures (like indictments and trials, where they would have an opportunity to confront their accusers). The right of due process has grown in two directions: It affords individuals a right to a fair process (known as procedural due process) and a right to enjoy certain fundamental liberties without governmental interference (known as substantive due process). The Fifth Amendments due process clause applies to the federal governments conduct. In 1868 the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment expanded the right of due process to include limits on the actions of state governments.

Today, court decisions interpreting the Fourteenth Amendments due process right generally apply to the Fifth Amendment and vice versa.

Takings Clause: The takings clause of the Fifth Amendment strikes a balance between the rights of private property owners and the right of the government to take that property for a purpose that benefits the public at large. When the government takes private property, it is required to pay just compensation to the property owner for his or her loss. The takings power of the government, sometimes referred to as the power of eminent domain, may be used for a wide range of valid public uses (for a highway or a park, for example). For the most part, when defining just compensation, courts try to reach some approximation of market value.